Cherokee Foothills HRC Spring Hunt Test Cancelled

[JoeOverby]

Your not alone on organizing HT. You assume the club can add another flight. Some do not have the resources (wingers, bird boys ect). I understand letting more dogs per guy but since the test has to finish in one day it still puts difficulty in completing the test. Especially since HRC allows everyone to run regardless if they are out.

What type of qualifications system are you talking about? Interested!

I understand the stresses, both time and financial, it puts on the clubs. However, if ther clubs at a local level cannot continue to successfullly put on weekend HT's then ultimately the money loss will be felt at a national level. The last thing I want to see is any HRC club discontinue existince. Anyone who knows me knows how adamant I am in supporting anything and everything HRC. It is where I started and where I love to play, however, the AKC has it figured out(atleast entry wise, judges requirements leave some to be desired). If a club wants to increase their numbers than don't limit the number that can sign up. Secondly, institute a hard close even 1 week prior to the event so that the club knows EXACTLY how many partricipants there will be. Yes, I know, "it's not fair" cries will ring out nationwide. But to those who wait until the day of to walk up and register, you make it nearly impossible for clubs to budget. You want to help?? Sign up EARLY....Lastly, Simply qualify for the Grand yearly by passing a minimum of 4 finished tests IN YOUR REGION, provided your region has atleast 4 opportunities for passes. This does 2 things. First, it ensures the support of those local clubs in your respective region. Secondly, it forces owners/handlers to choose what they run (AKC/HRC) on any given weekend before the deadline and allows clubs to plan accordingly. Now it really makes the AKC/HRC conflicting weekends interesting!! The HRC has forgotten that its success depends on success at the local club level...IMO they should be doing everything within their power to HELP local clubs rather than not giving us any power to affect our entry numbers in any way. We as local clubs have tried to encourage people to sign up in many ways. Fine em if they dont sign up by the deadline...and they get mad and don't come. Offer em an early entry discount and its not enough to matter...they still sign up the day of. Make em qualify, institute a nationally enforced hard close, and lift the restrictions on the number of dogs entered by one person and watch the numbers climb. Not to mention with more successful local clubs, it should lead to increased numbers at the Grand...and at the very least put some smiles on the faces of lots of club presidents!!

[wsumner]

Add another flight??? Cmon man. Average Joe gets a chance at the AKC HT's. Average Joe don't understand how hard it is to plan for a test when you have no idea how many handlers, dogs, or even if the test will happen. So lets just "ball-park" food and other expenses and pray like hell we don't go bankrupt. I've been putting on HT's for 7 yrs now as VP of our club. I know exactly what goes into it. I wanna see the HRC clubs succeed. Raise the limits and institute a qualification system.

Raising the limit and instituing a qualification system would do only two things. It would put more money in the pocket of the pros and increase the burden it places on the area's judging pool. Stakes can wait longer that they already do for dogs and handlers to show up. I didn't see your name on the judges list.
Don't get me wrong I judge and enjoy it but every test I judge is one my dogs do not get to run in. Here in Region 2, despite our efforts to increase the judges pool, we do not have enough judges. Those that judge would not have the same number of opportunities to qualify their dogs. Doe that sound fair to you?

Wayne Sumner
HT Chairman/Judge/Worker

[JoeOverby]

Raising the limit and instituing a qualification system would do only two things. It would put more money in the pocket of the pros and increase the burden it places on the area's judging pool. Stakes can wait longer that they already do for dogs and handlers to show up. I didn't see your name on the judges list.
Don't get me wrong I judge and enjoy it but every test I judge is one my dogs do not get to run in. Here in Region 2, despite our efforts to increase the judges pool, we do not have enough judges. Those that judge would not have the same number of opportunities to qualify their dogs. Doe that sound fair to you?

Wayne Sumner
HT Chairman/Judge/Worker

So now this is an attack on the pro??? Didn't see my name on the judges list?? FYI I AM a pro. I do not feel it right to take away opportunities from my clients not to run their dogs at every opportunity they want because I took a judging assignment. Place an extra burden on the area's judging pool??? What are the judges gonna judge if there aren't any HTs to judge because clubs can't continue to gamble on entries. This argument is not about lining pros pockets or longer wait times or strained judging pools. This is a very real problem that exists in our region. I saw it all last year and it isnt getting any better. There is no incentive for "average Joe" to sign up before a deadline or choose to support local HRC clubs over AKC events and this policy would achieve that. As far as my "dedication" goes....I help @ EVERY single HT I go to. Without them, my business suffers. I am VP of my club, HT chairman, and worker. I take care of securing/preparing HT grounds, secure judging accomodations, plan tailgates, secure caterers, clean up after the test, mind the club trailer, am responsible for ALL equipment, make sure every flight has what it needs.........all of the stuff behind the scenes that most don't see. Sorry I do not judge, is my contribution any less than yours because I cannot add judging to my resume??? I agree that when taking judging assignments one would lose an opportunity to run and under my proposal would make it even harder to qualify...there are other options. Friends, training partners, relatives, or yes, even a pro, could run your dog while you judge. All I am saying is without help from the national level local clubs are gonna continue to suffer, regardless of gas prices. Of course if participants would sign up BEFORE the day of, at least we could plan better. How many more clubs have to cancel tests before someone says enough?? I guess cancellations wont overstress the judging pool though...

[freebird]

Raising the limit and instituing a qualification system would do only two things. It would put more money in the pocket of the pros and increase the burden it places on the area's judging pool. Stakes can wait longer that they already do for dogs and handlers to show up. I didn't see your name on the judges list.
Don't get me wrong I judge and enjoy it but every test I judge is one my dogs do not get to run in. Here in Region 2, despite our efforts to increase the judges pool, we do not have enough judges. Those that judge would not have the same number of opportunities to qualify their dogs. Doe that sound fair to you?

Wayne Sumner
HT Chairman/Judge/Worker

How is this? AKC makes at least twice the money per hunt test than HRC. I run both and love HRC and the people the most. But HRC need to get with it!! I look at it from a clubs perspective the more dogs the $$.

[wsumner]

How is this? AKC makes at least twice the money per hunt test than HRC. I run both and love HRC and the people the most. But HRC need to get with it!! I look at it from a clubs perspective the more dogs the $$.

Simple more people run AKC. More entries with less expenses. One set of judges can judge up to 60 dogs in Master. In HRC that would require two sets of judges, workers, equipment, additional grounds, ect. Entries in AKC tests in our region always out number those for HRC and it has nothing to do with the MN qualifiers. I run both also and perfer the HRC but I see no need for a qualifer system in the HRC.

[freebird]

Simple more people run AKC. More entries with less expenses. One set of judges can judge up to 60 dogs in Master. In HRC that would require two sets of judges, workers, equipment, additional grounds, ect. Entries in AKC tests in our region always out number those for HRC and it has nothing to do with the MN qualifiers. I run both also and perfer the HRC but I see no need for a qualifer system in the HRC.

Agree that theres no need for a qualifier. But hrc needs to open up the flights more. limits on entries and limits on how many dogs a handler can run should change. The rules hurt the local clubs.

[wsumner]

So now this is an attack on the pro??? Didn't see my name on the judges list?? FYI I AM a pro. I do not feel it right to take away opportunities from my clients not to run their dogs at every opportunity they want because I took a judging assignment. Place an extra burden on the area's judging pool??? What are the judges gonna judge if there aren't any HTs to judge because clubs can't continue to gamble on entries. This argument is not about lining pros pockets or longer wait times or strained judging pools. This is a very real problem that exists in our region. I saw it all last year and it isnt getting any better. There is no incentive for "average Joe" to sign up before a deadline or choose to support local HRC clubs over AKC events and this policy would achieve that. As far as my "dedication" goes....I help @ EVERY single HT I go to. Without them, my business suffers. I am VP of my club, HT chairman, and worker. I take care of securing/preparing HT grounds, secure judging accomodations, plan tailgates, secure caterers, clean up after the test, mind the club trailer, am responsible for ALL equipment, make sure every flight has what it needs.........all of the stuff behind the scenes that most don't see. Sorry I do not judge, is my contribution any less than yours because I cannot add judging to my resume??? I agree that when taking judging assignments one would lose an opportunity to run and under my proposal would make it even harder to qualify...there are other options. Friends, training partners, relatives, or yes, even a pro, could run your dog while you judge. All I am saying is without help from the national level local clubs are gonna continue to suffer, regardless of gas prices. Of course if participants would sign up BEFORE the day of, at least we could plan better. How many more clubs have to cancel tests before someone says enough?? I guess cancellations wont overstress the judging pool though...

I have done everything you have at hunt tests. I am not a VP. I am a past Presdent. I am sure you do a lot at your test but I am not sure how much you can help at other tests if your clients and their dogs are your priority. I was not attacking pros just pointing out that pros would benefit from it and it doesn't do anything for the average Joe. In case you didn't know I can not judge my own dogs even if I have someone else run them. I have had friends run them in the past. Some have been successful some not. I still would perfer to run them myself, after all that is why I have them.
There is no HRC rule that prevents you from setting an early closing date for hunt test entries. If late entries are a problem for you, set a date to close entries.
One of the problems we as judges run into is waitng around for handlers, pro or non-pro, to get to a stake. We have to finish in a day and often waste time waiting before we can break down and move to another site. Increasing the number of dogs per handler would make this worst. Hire addition help and let them run some of the dogs.
FYI I figured you were a PRO. The link in your signature is a dead give away.

Wayne Sumner

[wsumner]

Agree that theres no need for a qualifier. But hrc needs to open up the flights more. limits on entries and limits on how many dogs a handler can run should change. The rules hurt the local clubs.

I don't see how we can judge more that 30 dogs/flight in a day unless they have callbacks. I've spent to much time waiting on handlers and dog to agree with raising the limit on number of dogs/handler. That another reason that more that 30 dogs/flight would be difficult.

Wayne

[JoeOverby]

I have done everything you have at hunt tests. I am not a VP. I am a past Presdent. I am sure you do a lot at your test but I am not sure how much you can help at other tests if your clients and their dogs are your priority. I was not attacking pros just pointing out that pros would benefit from it and it doesn't do anything for the average Joe. In case you didn't know I can not judge my own dogs even if I have someone else run them. I have had friends run them in the past. Some have been successful some not. I still would perfer to run them myself, after all that is why I have them.
There is no HRC rule that prevents you from setting an early closing date for hunt test entries. If late entries are a problem for you, set a date to close entries.
One of the problems we as judges run into is waitng around for handlers, pro or non-pro, to get to a stake. We have to finish in a day and often waste time waiting before we can break down and move to another site. Increasing the number of dogs per handler would make this worst. Hire addition help and let them run some of the dogs.
FYI I figured you were a PRO. The link in your signature is a dead give away.

Wayne Sumner

How do only the pros benefit from it?? That makes absolutely no sense to me!! More entries means more money for the club. More successful clubs means more opportunities for the "average Joe" to run their dogs. I understand that you want to run your own dogs. I also know you cannot judge your own dogs, but, with more entries means more flights which means your dog(s) could run in another flight while you judge. Also, we can set a close date but until it is a HARD close ppl are still allowed to sign up the day of. For example, last fall Charleston retriever club signed up 40% of its entries on the day of the test. They listed the test on Hunt Secretary and closed it 1 week before. Still the ppl didnt pre register and waited until the day of. Tell me how Charleston is supposed to budget for this?? Again, it is merely a roll of the dice. I saw this test in test out last year and it simply puts an uneccessary burden on local clubs when we could be focusing our efforts on finding more judges, borrowing more equipment and locating more birds and bird boys for the additional flights hard closes, qualifications and no dog limits policy. I would rather have that problem than the problem of the test even being a possibility. As far as hiring more help, I don't need it to only run 8 dogs. Let me run 20 and i'll gladly put my assistant to work. I make it a point to treat the weekend tests like my job and not keep flights waiting. If people keep in mind that people are waiting on you and that this is not just a social event than less would wait. The other half of that is educating your marshalls to keep the dogs running smoothly and keeping the PROS and AMATEURS with multiple dogs cycling through as expedisously as possible. The waiting problem, IMO, is not ONLY the pros fault for running multiple dogs in multiple flights but also falls squarely on the shoulders of the HT committee properly staffing each stake. Hire additional help to help run the test and watch it run more smoothly. Both Old South and Us(NGHRC) use both flight managers and marshalls to keep stakes running smoothly. PM me if you would like more specifics on how we make it work and i'll be glad to share with you what works for us in keeping the dogs moving. Finally, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again hoping for a different result. It is obvious that the current system isn't working. We have been blaming increased gas prices for 3 years all the while witnessing first hand AKC events fill their flights with dogs that otherwise COULD be running in the HRC. This is not meant to spark the AKC vs HRC argument as it is pointless to argue preference but their entries (atleast not here in my region) are not suffering while those of the HRC are. Oh, by the way, I do manage to help out in any way I can at EVERY test I attend all while keeping my dogs and their clients my top priority. References available upon request!!

[wsumner]

We have been told that we can have a hard close date if we desire but do not choose to. The mistake was made by the club that allowed sign up after the advertised close date. All they had to do was show them the premium and explain that entries were closed. They may be mad that year but they would definately sign up on time next.
I have learned to estimate the number of late entries based on previous years and it use to be quite high (about 1/2 the number that sign up early). We offer an early entry discount of $10 and it has brought the percentage of walk-in entries down.
Our test run completely on volunteer help. The clubs up here do not make enough money to pay help nor do we have a readily available source for workers. The help is often inexperienced and they could do a better job but we are just thankful to have them and do the best we can with who we have. I'm sure you do all you can to help at the tests but caring for and hauling 8 dogs from stake to stake to run doesn't leave much time for you do much else during the test.
What I don't understand is how allowing more dogs per handler will increase the opportunities for the "average joe". Running more dogs may inturn mean more money and work for a club but it does tranlate to more clubs with more tests. It won't increase the number of workers or judges or people who are willing to chair a HT.
Up here nearly every weekend is either a AKC or HRC test. We do are best not to schedule an event that goes head to head with another venue. HRC runs mostly May-mid June. (4 clubs), HRC tests in Sept. (1 club) AKC run mostly mid June-Sept.
Load up your dogs and come on up. I sure between us we can solve all the HRC problems over a beer at the tailgate. Good luck with your dogs.

Wayne Sumner
Yankee Waterfowlers HRC
June 2,3 2012